Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Share
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  nemrod on Sun May 12, 2013 1:36 pm

    http://french.ruvr.ru/2013_05_11/L-OTAN-a-detruit-notre-pays-methodiquement-et-sans-pitie/

    Zoran Mladenoviċ gives us a very good evidence about US air campaign against Serbia, during the war in 1999.

    l’OTAN bombarde Belgrade. » Mais nous n’avons pas eu peur et nous avons continué de vivre plus ou moins normalement. La plupart des missiles et des bombes ont été largués dans le quartier de Stražavica. Il y avait dans cette zone des divisions de notre armée. Elles étaient installées sous terre, c’est pourquoi l’OTAN a bombardé le périmètre sans interruption, jour et nuit. Mais ils n’ont tout de même pas réussi à endommager les souterrains.


    He explained that Nato bombed continuously Belgrad, and especially Stražavica a quarter in Belgrad, where yugoslav army were positionned inside undergroud. In spite of massiv bombing, Zoran said that no undergrounds were damaged.
    This is what I suspected since the begining, despite nato's hype, the result of bombings is subject to controverse.
    It does not astonnished me if the recent Israelis airstrike against Syria, the result could exceed 30%.

    Moreover, during the Desert Storm the statistic of air bomb campaign, about air strike rarely exceed 25-35%. The only one who succeeded was F-117 Nighthawk, with a statistic reaching 60-80%.

    Zoran Mladenoviċ explained that the air campaign was cruel against environnement -notice most our western  pseudo environememtalists standed firmly with nato air campaign against the so-called dictator Milosevic-, because nato used depleted uranium, that destroyed forests, waters, lands where peasants cultivated are poisened during centuries. Obviously this shocked noone, every human rights, and women rights thinks this was normal. Every thing could be justified while the hardware is used against the so-called Milosevic dictator. Whatever civilians dead or not.

    sheytanelkebir

    Posts : 505
    Points : 522
    Join date : 2013-09-16

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  sheytanelkebir on Tue Sep 17, 2013 11:08 am

    Its no surprise at all.

    The effort required to actually destroy such hardened facilities with "conventional" munitions is very high. This means that whilst in theory the US COULD destroy individual bunkers with a concerted effort, they would be incapable of putting out of action the military of even a relatively small state like Serbia USING CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS ALONE.

    That is obviously a result of the "cold war" ... when defensive measures were built up for a Nuclear Conflict, whilst "offensive" measures against them were also planned to be "Nuclear"... Thus in a limited war, where the nuclear option is off-limits, the weakness of conventional weapons against such opponents becomes clear.

    However the US has been content to "button up" an opponent to achieve tactical victory...
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Serbians downed B-2A during 1999?

    Post  nemrod on Sun Jan 19, 2014 3:59 pm

    Untill now, I used to believe that F22 and B2A were the ultimate US weapons against Russia, and no export russian weapons match with these hardwares. I was so anxious, this why I posted the subject here in Russia defense forum, hoping to know your opinion.

    I searched, and a friend in another forum, sent me  this  links where  colonel Đorđe Aničić said that during the war against Serbia, almost the the half of the world with nearly 1000 aircrafts were in war against little Serbia. However unable to won in a decicive way the war against Serbia. Colonel Đorđe Aničić commanded the 250 th Brigade anti aircraft missile, he  explained that they downed 5 aircrafts, 3 were acknowledged by nato, but the 2 others, Nato refuses to admit the losses.

    He said, they downed F-117, and B2A that crashed into Croatia after downed by DCA.

    I understand now, why just only 20 B2 were built, and F-117 retired from USAF. I understand too, why, USA did not dare, to trigger a war against Syria, as Russia was determined to help Syria.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:07 pm

    The US is a notorius liar and tries to keep its propagated image as the mightiest of the mightiest military that is untouchable to maintaine.
    They are known that they are tellings lies about their losses of aircrafts in wars such as Korean war while they made propaganda of 10:1 kill ratios between F-86 vs MiG-15 planes and reduced this numbers over years to 7:1 than 5:1 and stopped at 3:1 while the actual numbers were reported with the date when a jet was shot down with the pilot, the number of aircraft, location and hitmarks on the victim or those of the own which were lost. At the end of the day the actual losses of F-86 Sabres were 547 in air to air combats against MiG's, while 317 MiG-15 were shot down by Sabres. That is a ratio of 1.72:1 in favor for MiG's.


    Also MiG-21 vs F-4 was also in favor of MiG-21 with a similiar ratio.

    They lied and still lie about losses in korea,vietnam and Serbia. And they will continue to do so.
    A B2 bomber is an obsolete weapon that has no future and no purpose. It has no defensive systemes and every army with NVG and an old AA Flak cannon can touch it.

    And for sure an army with mediocre SAM's like Serbs had which were already outdated but still kicked US Airforce arses.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  TR1 on Sun Jan 19, 2014 10:05 pm

    There are like a handful of B-2s in total.

    I think one missing right after Serbia would have been noticed.
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1974
    Points : 2139
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Cyberspec on Mon Jan 20, 2014 7:03 am

    Zoltan Dani and his crew are adamant to this day that they hit a "large stealth target" which they interpreted to be a B-2. They're saying they tracked the target, fired at it and registered a hit.

    One theory is that they might have hit a B-2 towed decoy or maybe managed to damage one as it's very unlikely that they actually shot down a B-2.

    On a related note, it's been confirmed since then that they did damage a second F-117 which managed to make it back to base.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16535
    Points : 17143
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 20, 2014 8:42 am

    In terms of what it can do the B-2A is no more or less useful to the US than the Tu-95 is to the Russians.

    The B-2A does cost rather more however...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Jan 20, 2014 10:53 am

    GarryB wrote:In terms of what it can do the B-2A is no more or less useful to the US than the Tu-95 is to the Russians.

    The B-2A does cost rather more however...

    Meaning the B-2A has the same if not lower use than a technology of mid 50's.

    I think you are right with that.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  nemrod on Mon Jan 20, 2014 1:48 pm

    Werewolf wrote:The US is a notorius liar and tries to keep its propagated image as the mightiest of the mightiest military that is untouchable to maintaine.
    They are known that they are tellings lies about their losses of aircrafts in wars such as Korean war while they made propaganda of 10:1 kill ratios between F-86 vs MiG-15 planes and reduced this numbers over years to 7:1 than 5:1 and stopped at 3:1 while the actual numbers were reported with the date when  a jet was shot down with the pilot, the number of aircraft, location and hitmarks on the victim or those of the own which were lost. At the end of the day the actual losses of F-86 Sabres were 547 in air to air combats against MiG's, while 317 MiG-15 were shot down by Sabres. That is a ratio of 1.72:1 in favor for MiG's.


    Also MiG-21 vs F-4 was also in favor of MiG-21 with a similiar ratio.

    They lied and still lie about losses in korea,vietnam and Serbia. And they will continue to do so.
    A B2 bomber is an obsolete weapon that has no future and no purpose. It has no defensive systemes and every army with NVG and an old AA Flak cannon can touch it.

    And for sure an army with mediocre SAM's like Serbs had which were already outdated but still kicked US Airforce arses.

    Indeed, the US hadware is always overrated under its real value in the battlefield.
    Iam now looking for the exact israeli losses during Kippour War, how hard it is to find a fair informations about that. In Wikipedia, the israelis claimed just only 102 aircrafts downed, and most of them by AAA. Moreover, during the 30 years of conflict between israelis and arabs, Israel claimed just only 5 aircrafts were downed in air to air combat . It is a joke! Big joke!

    Let"s back to the Vietnam war, as it was wrotten in this website, US lost at least 3.600 aircrafts fixed wings, far from 2.200 claimed in Wikipedia.
    Well, if US lost at least 3.600 aircrafts during Vietnam war, by which miracle Israel lost 102 aircrafts, and 5 in air to air combat during 30 years ? Do not forget too, during the kippour war, as in attrition war between Egypt and Israel, many soviet pilots were involved, like in Vietnam. I suspect, many Mig 21 were piloted by soviets, and caused a big damage during Rollingthunder, and Linebacker I, and II, as in Kippour War, and Attrition war.

    If someone among you could tell me about the exact US losses during desert storm in 1991, because I don't believe DoD's figures, as they claimed just 52 aircrafts fixed wings. Do not forget that most of the Iraqis air defense was soviets's sam origins.

    Thx Werewolf about the korean's war figures. I ignored this too.
    avatar
    SOC

    Posts : 581
    Points : 628
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 39
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  SOC on Mon Jan 20, 2014 4:19 pm

    TR1 wrote:There are like a handful of B-2s in total.

    I think one missing right after Serbia would have been noticed.

    Don't forget that they've never not been nuclear assets. As such they're treaty accountable. If a loss was either reported to Russia as a status change or discovered by Russia through the various inspection processes why would they have kept quiet about it?
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  nemrod on Wed Jan 29, 2014 1:05 pm

    Thx to all for your explanations.

    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3246
    Points : 3352
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  flamming_python on Wed Jan 29, 2014 2:00 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:Zoltan Dani and his crew are adamant to this day that they hit a "large stealth target" which they interpreted to be a B-2. They're saying they tracked the target, fired at it and registered a hit.

    One theory is that they might have hit a B-2 towed decoy or maybe managed to damage one as it's very unlikely that they actually shot down a B-2.

    On a related note, it's been confirmed since then that they did damage a second F-117 which managed to make it back to base.

    ZOLTAN!

    Come on, you can't take a guy seriously - with a name like that Smile
    avatar
    macedonian

    Posts : 1080
    Points : 1113
    Join date : 2013-04-29
    Location : Skopje, Macedonia - Скопје, Македонија

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  macedonian on Fri Jan 31, 2014 10:23 pm

    SOC wrote:Don't forget that they've never not been nuclear assets.  As such they're treaty accountable.  If a loss was either reported to Russia as a status change or discovered by Russia through the various inspection processes why would they have kept quiet about it?
    Oh " treaty accountable" eh?! Yes, that sounds reasonable - by all means tell me more Very Happy ...are you truly suggesting that we (the world's citizens) should (at this very moment, knowing what we know?!) go about trusting you Americans about respecting any sort of treaty or law? Hilarious! I wouldn't trust a government employed American as far as I can throw him...(sh-t...I just realized how much I enjoy throwing an American employed by the US Govt.) Very Happy
    Preach to someone who hasn't been affected in a bad way by your government (p.s. good luck finding such an imaginary person Very Happy ).


    flamming_python wrote:
    ZOLTAN!

    Come on, you can't take a guy seriously - with a name like that Smile
    Keep practicing FP...as much as I like you, I ha(t)ve to tell you: "When sense of humor was given out, you weren't waiting in line"...I do understand the English influence though...
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Feb 01, 2014 1:49 pm

    Americans have constantly ignored START1/2 treaties and haven't fullfilled obligations to reduce the nuclear weaponary in the necessary speed which was aggreed on in the terms.

    The entire USAF is based on the sholders of PR of its multi trln development of the stealth programm aircrafts. A F-117 was shot down and they had immidiatley to retire it, it was not worth. Bombing some Bananarepublics and than coming to such a small country with 1mln less population than New York city and getting ass beaten by export outdated models and highly sophisticated tactics and strategic decoys of airfields,tanks and so on.

    US was so desperate they purposley started to target civilians because they couldn't comprimise the military effectivness.

    The B-2 is an unworth bird, no defense suite except its "stealth" which only functions against iraqis without air defense network and any night capability and with an army that struggled through two decades of sanctions that crippled the military strenght to a white elephant.

    That is the current situation of USAF, their actuall power still lies on older generations of F-15,F-16 and F-18, no more nor less.
    F-22,B-2 and F-35 will NEVER be an asset on a military equal level.

    You can imagine the F-35 as a person which is 1.45m tall and about same size in horizontal sphere with all fancy new weapons like a PKP,Shmel,RPG-30/32 and is supposed to surve in GRU unit.

    A clumsy fat little guy that thinks he can become a warrior.

    They are just PR and money makers for MIC.

    Unfinished technology that still thumbles in the past like F-22, no IRST, the radar is outdated even by PESA like export model of IRBIS radar, lack of functionality, overprized garfield that prefers to stay at home in the warm.
    avatar
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1175
    Points : 1184
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sun Feb 02, 2014 3:48 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    US was so desperate they purposley started to target civilians because they couldn't comprimise the military effectivness.

    The B-2 is an unworth bird, no defense suite except its "stealth" which only functions against iraqis without air defense network and any night capability and with an army that struggled through two decades of sanctions that crippled the military strenght to a white elephant.

    That is the current situation of USAF, their actuall power still lies on older generations of F-15,F-16 and F-18, no more nor less.
    F-22,B-2 and F-35 will NEVER be an asset on a military equal level.

    You can imagine the F-35 as a person which is 1.45m tall and about same size in horizontal sphere with all fancy new weapons like a PKP,Shmel,RPG-30/32 and is supposed to surve in GRU unit.

    A clumsy fat little guy that thinks he can become a warrior.

    They are just PR and money makers for MIC.

    Unfinished technology that still thumbles in the past like F-22, no IRST, the radar is outdated even by PESA like export model of IRBIS radar, lack of functionality, overprized garfield that prefers to stay at home in the warm.
    IMO US air power is still best for offense. Aside from the embargo, this is the best tool for punishing naughty nations that cant quite defend themselves; ie a good 2/3ish of the world. Any decent enemy gets the two plus a NATO coalition bonus if they're lucky. and anything above that there is nukes.
    Also, I think the B-2 is a nice bird... pity it just costs 2 billion bucks a piece. The F-22 too, tho it would be too late now to restart production for both. The F-35 is a nice attempt, but basing it on the VTOL means its sh!t.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Feb 03, 2014 3:08 am

    No country can use Nukes regardless against which country.

    As soon someone is really that stupid or attempting a False Flag attack to blame another country for the use of Nuclear weapons meaning everything would go on DEFCON 1 and everyone would be eager to push the bottons before risking only to recieve.

    As soon a missile is detected on any early warning radars from any Nuclear Power, they would assume that this attack is directed at them and be justified to use their arsenal.

    Nukes will never be used openly in large numbers, they will blame terrorists who somehow good their hands on some mystical old Soviet forgotten Nuclear bunker, like they propagandize since decades in movies that Soviets/Russians are somehow sloppy with their nuclear Arsenal,but as a matter of fact it is the West that delivered nuke and technology via France/South Africa to Israel.
    avatar
    Regular

    Posts : 2029
    Points : 2033
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Regular on Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:06 am

    Actually US doesn't have good track record in keeping their nuclear potential safe. Y-12 complex was breached by some anti-nuclear activists couple years ago Very Happy Not to mention how many A bombs US lost Smile
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16535
    Points : 17143
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  GarryB on Mon Feb 03, 2014 8:18 am

    IMO US air power is still best for offense. Aside from the embargo, this is the best tool for punishing naughty nations that cant quite defend themselves; ie a good 2/3ish of the world.

    The US have very high standards and quite appealing (to me) morals, but they never use those standards and morals to look at their own behaviour and often use these standards to judge other nations.

    They will never invade a nation that hasn't attacked them first or where there is no value to them to attack.

    They call it being the worlds policeman, but if you examine their actions it is more a lynch mob of the willing.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    SOC

    Posts : 581
    Points : 628
    Join date : 2011-09-13
    Age : 39
    Location : Indianapolis

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  SOC on Thu Feb 06, 2014 4:18 am

    macedonian wrote:
    SOC wrote:Don't forget that they've never not been nuclear assets.  As such they're treaty accountable.  If a loss was either reported to Russia as a status change or discovered by Russia through the various inspection processes why would they have kept quiet about it?
    Oh " treaty accountable" eh?! Yes, that sounds reasonable - by all means tell me more Very Happy ...are you truly suggesting that we (the world's citizens) should (at this very moment, knowing what we know?!) go about trusting you Americans about respecting any sort of treaty or law? Hilarious! I wouldn't trust a government employed American as far as I can throw him...(sh-t...I just realized how much I enjoy throwing an American employed by the US Govt.) Very Happy
    Preach to someone who hasn't been affected in a bad way by your government (p.s. good luck finding such an imaginary person Very Happy ).

    Translation: there is not, nor has there ever been, any actual evidence that a B-2 was shot down.

    Mindstorm

    Posts : 771
    Points : 948
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Mindstorm on Thu Feb 06, 2014 9:31 am





    SOC wrote:Translation: there is not, nor has there ever been, any actual evidence that a B-2 was shot down


    Exact to the letter.

    Case dismissed.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16535
    Points : 17143
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:50 am

    Agreed... the fact that the US government lies is not sufficient... you need concrete evidence that a B-2 has been lost to make such a claim.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:29 pm

    GarryB wrote:Agreed... the fact that the US government lies is not sufficient... you need concrete evidence that a B-2 has been lost to make such a claim.
    There is lack of evidence that it was shot down but there is also big lack of trust to anything US spews out about their or enemy losses.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16535
    Points : 17143
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:15 pm

    Also very true, if the US State Department had its way no one would know of the failure of the Patriot missile system and it would all be swept under the rug.

    What they don't realise is that this shiny sunglass view of US forces... perfect forces that can do no wrong is very much like the Yes Man mentality that destroyed a lot of companies. Not being prepared to think for yourself, not being prepared to criticise things, not being open to change led to a lot of companies collapsing because no one would speak up about things going wrong.

    People speaking out about wrong doing like the now famous whistle blowers are treated like traitors and enemies of the state but if they don't stand up then the train will continue to hurtle towards the cliff and no one will do anything to change direction or stop the train.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Indian Flanker

    Posts : 162
    Points : 173
    Join date : 2014-02-28
    Location : India- Land of the Tiger

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Indian Flanker on Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:39 am

    TR1 wrote:I wouldn't be so sure.
    Irbis out-ranges is handily, just because it is not full AESA does not make it subjectively worse.
    I agree. This is where the sure size/power of the super flanker helps.

    In a knife-fight you really can't go wrong with either.
    No doubt about it.
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2065
    Points : 2083
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  KiloGolf on Tue Nov 24, 2015 9:25 pm

    From hellenic TV reports

    Sponsored content

    Re: 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:34 am